Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Large file support + memory usage review #26

Open
dkarlovi opened this issue Aug 17, 2018 · 2 comments
Open

Large file support + memory usage review #26

dkarlovi opened this issue Aug 17, 2018 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@dkarlovi
Copy link
Collaborator

@dkarlovi dkarlovi added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 17, 2018
@dkarlovi dkarlovi added this to the 0.2 milestone Aug 17, 2018
@dkarlovi dkarlovi changed the title Large file support Large file support + memory usage review Aug 17, 2018
@dkarlovi
Copy link
Collaborator Author

dkarlovi commented Mar 3, 2022

@ohaag
Copy link

ohaag commented Nov 16, 2022

Hello,
I don't know if this is the good place since I don't know at all this repository.
I followed the topic PHPOffice/PhpSpreadsheet#629 which led me here and I wanted to provide some perfomance comparisons.

This was tested with the exact same code automatically migrated with rector from phpoffice/phpexcel 1.8.2 to phpoffice/phpspreadsheet 1.25.2, with XDebug disabled on a symfony prod environment.
A CSV file with 129820 lines and 20 columns (~20Mo) was processed (reader->load + same business logic every time)

with a chunk size of 3000 :

  • 1.2min with phpexcel
  • 5.8min with phpspreadsheet

with a chunk size of 10000 :

  • 34sec with phpexcel

with a chunk size of 65000 :

  • 26sec with phpexcel
  • 4.0min with phpspreadsheet

Of course, I checked in debug where duration explode to more than 15min (I stopped here), the vast majority of time is spent on the calls of CsvReader->load().

A large part of the duration (4min become 1.2min) is caused by the following lines. Is it really mandatory ? If it is some aesthetic behavior could we just make it optional ?

@dkarlovi dkarlovi removed this from the 0.3 - Good First Issue milestone Jan 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants